faustinoaq changed the topic of #amber to: Welcome to Amber Framework community! | https://amberframework.org | Developer happiness, productivity and bare metal performance | GH: https://github.com/amberframework | Docs: https://docs.amberframework.org | Gitter: https://gitter.im/amberframework/amber | IRC Logger: https://irclog.whitequark.org/amber | Amber::Server.start
_whitelogger has joined #amber
_whitelogger has joined #amber
<FromGitter> <elorest> I was looking through that issue earlier. Super swamped at work this week as well though.
<FromGitter> <elorest> I did manage to push a new release of amber last night which fixed a lot of outstanding issues.
<FromGitter> <kvirani> Noice, congrats on the new release. I'll take a look to see what's changed. Loving the framework so far as I use it for a semi-serious side project. Rails is my go-to so that makes Amber easy to adopt, and where-ever it differs in opinion it makes sense and I prefer the Amber Way™ in terms of what I've seen so far (exclusion of `form_for`, webpack for CSS *and* JS, granite being explicit about field mappings, etc).
<FromGitter> <elorest> that's really good to hear. That was our goal when we started building it. We've met with some resistance against doing it the rails way but I've been with rails since 2006 and really like a lot of it.
<FromGitter> <elorest> I'm also using amber on a pretty large project here at Nikola.
<FromGitter> <elorest> In regard to the docs if references aren't mentioned please submit a PR.
<FromGitter> <kvirani> Same. I've used Rails since 1.2 (I think it was) which was at the end of 2007. I do think it went too far in terms of levels of abstractions in some ways, but that's a tough opinion to properly argue. ⏎ ⏎ Anyway, as for the docs... *will do*. I think the docs are a great start and REALLY impressive for such a young project, but up against Rails or other mature libs/frameworks, they are quite light. For example,
<FromGitter> ... SEO on them is REALLY weak. Surprisingly weak.